Comparing E-quizzes (Trivia maker™) and paper-based tests on cognitive load, usability, and performance outcomes among university students.
Saved in:
| Title: | Comparing E-quizzes (Trivia maker™) and paper-based tests on cognitive load, usability, and performance outcomes among university students. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Tannoubi, Amayra1,2 (AUTHOR) elvis.hagan@ucc.edu.gh, Ouergui, Ibrahim3,4 (AUTHOR), Bonsaksen, Tore5,6 (AUTHOR), Srem-Sai, Medina7 (AUTHOR), Hagan, John Elvis8,9 (AUTHOR) elvis.hagan@ucc.edu.gh, Setiawan, Edi10 (AUTHOR), Azaiez, Fairouz1 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Frontiers in Education. 2026, p1-14. 14p. |
| Subject Terms: | *Cognitive load, *Educational tests & measurements, *College students, *Educational evaluation, *Educational technology, *Academic achievement, User-centered system design |
| Abstract: | Background: Digital educational platforms have gained notable traction as assessment tools alongside traditional methods. These different assessment tools may impact on several educational and psychological variables. This study investigated the effects of two evaluation modalities, namely Electronic-quizzes and PP, on cognitive load, usability perception, and performance outcomes among university students. Methods: In a quasi-experimental pre/post-test study design with two intact classes was employed. Ninety-four undergraduate students (age: 23 ± 1.6 years) were allocated by class to an Electronic-Quiz group (E-quiz, n = 47; male = 42%; female = 58%) or a PP group (PP, n = 47; male = 53%; female = 47). Before and after 8 weeks, students completed identical performance-based quizzes and evaluated their cognitive load using the Cognitive Load Scale (CLS), comprising three dimensions: intrinsic load (IL), extraneous load (EL), and germane load (GL), as well as their perception of usability System Usability Scale (SUS). Results: Mixed-model ANOVA revealed significant Time × Group interactions for most primary outcomes. For GL, the E-quiz group showed a large within-group gain (d = 1.40), while the PP group showed negligible change (d = 0.15); between-group post-test difference was medium (d = 0.67, ηp 2 = 0.256). For SUS, the E-quiz group demonstrated large improvement (d = 0.96) compared to PP (d = 0.17), with a medium between-group effect (d = 0.66, ηp 2 = 0.516). For performance, the E-quiz group exhibited a very large within-group gain (d = 1.71), whereas the PP group showed negligible change (d = 0.05); the post-test between-group difference was large (d = 1.82, ηp 2 = 0.623). IL increased only in the E-quiz group (d = 1.15, ηp 2 = 0.203), while both groups showed comparable increases in EL (ηp 2 = 0.030, ns). Conclusion: In this sample, E-quizzes were associated with larger gains in GL, perceived usability, and academic performance than paper-based tests, and uniquely elevated perceived intrinsic complexity. These findings align with cognitive load theory predictions regarding the potential role of digital assessment design in supporting germane processing, though the mechanisms remain hypothetical and warrant further investigation. Well-designed digital assessment tools may merit consideration for integration in higher education, contingent on careful design to minimize EL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Frontiers in Education is the property of Frontiers Media S.A. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Education Research Complete |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: ehh DbLabel: Education Research Complete An: 192587994 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Comparing E-quizzes (Trivia maker™) and paper-based tests on cognitive load, usability, and performance outcomes among university students. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Tannoubi%2C+Amayra%22">Tannoubi, Amayra</searchLink><relatesTo>1,2</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> elvis.hagan@ucc.edu.gh</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ouergui%2C+Ibrahim%22">Ouergui, Ibrahim</searchLink><relatesTo>3,4</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bonsaksen%2C+Tore%22">Bonsaksen, Tore</searchLink><relatesTo>5,6</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Srem-Sai%2C+Medina%22">Srem-Sai, Medina</searchLink><relatesTo>7</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hagan%2C+John+Elvis%22">Hagan, John Elvis</searchLink><relatesTo>8,9</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<i> elvis.hagan@ucc.edu.gh</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Setiawan%2C+Edi%22">Setiawan, Edi</searchLink><relatesTo>10</relatesTo> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Azaiez%2C+Fairouz%22">Azaiez, Fairouz</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo> (AUTHOR) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Frontiers+in+Education%22">Frontiers in Education</searchLink>. 2026, p1-14. 14p. – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+load%22">Cognitive load</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+tests+%26+measurements%22">Educational tests & measurements</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+students%22">College students</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+evaluation%22">Educational evaluation</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+technology%22">Educational technology</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+achievement%22">Academic achievement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22User-centered+system+design%22">User-centered system design</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Background: Digital educational platforms have gained notable traction as assessment tools alongside traditional methods. These different assessment tools may impact on several educational and psychological variables. This study investigated the effects of two evaluation modalities, namely Electronic-quizzes and PP, on cognitive load, usability perception, and performance outcomes among university students. Methods: In a quasi-experimental pre/post-test study design with two intact classes was employed. Ninety-four undergraduate students (age: 23 ± 1.6 years) were allocated by class to an Electronic-Quiz group (E-quiz, n = 47; male = 42%; female = 58%) or a PP group (PP, n = 47; male = 53%; female = 47). Before and after 8 weeks, students completed identical performance-based quizzes and evaluated their cognitive load using the Cognitive Load Scale (CLS), comprising three dimensions: intrinsic load (IL), extraneous load (EL), and germane load (GL), as well as their perception of usability System Usability Scale (SUS). Results: Mixed-model ANOVA revealed significant Time × Group interactions for most primary outcomes. For GL, the E-quiz group showed a large within-group gain (d = 1.40), while the PP group showed negligible change (d = 0.15); between-group post-test difference was medium (d = 0.67, ηp 2 = 0.256). For SUS, the E-quiz group demonstrated large improvement (d = 0.96) compared to PP (d = 0.17), with a medium between-group effect (d = 0.66, ηp 2 = 0.516). For performance, the E-quiz group exhibited a very large within-group gain (d = 1.71), whereas the PP group showed negligible change (d = 0.05); the post-test between-group difference was large (d = 1.82, ηp 2 = 0.623). IL increased only in the E-quiz group (d = 1.15, ηp 2 = 0.203), while both groups showed comparable increases in EL (ηp 2 = 0.030, ns). Conclusion: In this sample, E-quizzes were associated with larger gains in GL, perceived usability, and academic performance than paper-based tests, and uniquely elevated perceived intrinsic complexity. These findings align with cognitive load theory predictions regarding the potential role of digital assessment design in supporting germane processing, though the mechanisms remain hypothetical and warrant further investigation. Well-designed digital assessment tools may merit consideration for integration in higher education, contingent on careful design to minimize EL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Frontiers in Education is the property of Frontiers Media S.A. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=192587994 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.3389/feduc.2026.1780194 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 14 StartPage: 1 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Cognitive load Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational tests & measurements Type: general – SubjectFull: College students Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational technology Type: general – SubjectFull: Academic achievement Type: general – SubjectFull: User-centered system design Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Comparing E-quizzes (Trivia maker™) and paper-based tests on cognitive load, usability, and performance outcomes among university students. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Tannoubi, Amayra – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Ouergui, Ibrahim – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Bonsaksen, Tore – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Srem-Sai, Medina – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Hagan, John Elvis – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Setiawan, Edi – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Azaiez, Fairouz IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 27 M: 03 Text: 2026 Type: published Y: 2026 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 2504284X Titles: – TitleFull: Frontiers in Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |